Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Editorial overview: New advances in social neuroscience: from neural computations to social structures David M Amodio and Christian Keysers Current Opinion in Psychology 2019, 24:iv–vi For a complete overview see the Issue Available online 2nd November 2018 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.10.017 2352-250X/ã 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1,2 David M Amodio We are delighted to present this special issue on Social Neuroscience, in which we feature some of the most exciting recent developments in this vibrant field. These developments reflect an important shift in social neuroscience research, from earlier interest in identifying brain regions that respond to particular social stimuli (i.e. the so-called ‘blobology’ approach), toward questions about the specific neural mechanisms that contribute to social cognition and behavior and their roles in broader contexts of human social interaction. These conceptual advances regarding mechanism have been made by 1 Department of Psychology, New York focusing on two central questions: first what computations are performed University, 6 Washington Place, New York, in specific brain networks and second how do they causally contribute to 2 NY, 10003, USA Department of Psychology, social behavior? These questions are central both to neuroscience and social University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht cognition. Neuroscience seeks to understand how the brain works, and given 129 B, P.O. Box 15900, 1001 NK, Amsterdam, The Netherlands that the human brain evolved in a context where social functioning pro- e-mail: [email protected] moted survival, social computations are often key to deciphering the operations of the brain. Social cognition, by comparison, seeks to understand David Amodio is Associate Professor of the processes that underlie social behavior and the human social experience, Psychology and Neural Science at New York exploring the computations performed by the brain and their relation to University and Professor of Psychology at the behavior can inform theoretical models of social cognition and behavior, University of Amsterdam, and director of the which in turn help to explain societal and economic phenomena and inform NYU Social Neuroscience Laboratory. His research examines the psychological and efforts to promote human well-being. neural processes involved in prejudice and social cognition, with a focus on how implicit These dramatic advances in our understanding of neural computation were biases are formed, expressed, and regulated. made possible by recent methodological innovations. The use of computa- His scientific contributions have been tional models and multivoxel pattern analyses, in particular, have brought recognized with awards fromThe US White House, American Psychological Association, about a significant change in how we study the brain. Computational models and Association for Psychological Science. transform theories of learning and decision-making into quantitative pre- 1,2 dictions of neural activation at specific timepoints, which can then be fit to Christian Keysers patterns of neural and behavioral data to test a particular hypothesis [1–3]. With this method, one can pit competing theories against one another. Specifically, different theories predict different time-series of brain activity. After measuring the actual brain activity, one can then use Bayesian statistics to calculate the probability that competing models—and by extension, theories—correctly account for the observed data. Multivoxel pattern classification enriches our understanding by allowing us to explore the dimensionality of the representational space of our brain [4,5]: what processesare more alike,whichare moredifferent?Arefelt andperceived 1 Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for emotions represented in a similar code (e.g. [6])? And to what extend does a Neuroscience, KNAW, Meibergdreef 47, neural structure support multiple representations or processes (e.g. [7])? This Current Opinion in Psychology 2018, 24:iv–vi www.sciencedirect.com Editorial overview Amodio and Keysers v 1105BA Amsterdam, trend toward assessingtheroles ofdistributed patternsofactivity, either within 2 The Netherlands Department of Psychology, a region or across multiple regions, has produced new theoretical models of Brain and Cognition, University of Amsterdam, how we perceive people, form impressions, and update impressions [1,4,8]. Amsterdam, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] Utilization of nonhuman animal models of social behavior, such as nonhu- Christian Keysers is full professor for Social man primate and, increasingly, rodent models, enable us to peer deeper into Neuroscience and leads with Valeria Gazzola the cellular code that implements social cognition. Mirror neurons were the the Social Brain Lab at the Netherlands key example of the value of this cellular perspective, providing unique Institute for Neuroscience which combines evidence for embodied social cognition, but recent work has expanded its rodent and human work to understand social purview, new models of emotional contagion and helping behavior in behavior. His work on auditory mirror neurons and somatosensory and affective rodents promise to provide further insights into the computations that mirroring was cited >20 000 times. He is an underpin affective social processes [9], and non-human primate data is ERC laureate, member of the Young shedding light on how mentalizing might have evolved [2]. Academy of Europe and the Academia Europaea and authored The Empathic Brain. Our understanding of the necessary nature of the computations performed in particular brain circuits remain central to our understanding of the brain, and this continues to rely mainly on the use of neuromodulation and lesion studies. For instance, years of neuroimaging provided evidence for both mentalizing and simulation processes in the perception of others’ actions and emotions, with much debate regarding which is more important. Lesion studies and neuromodulation have now provided robust evidence that both processes are important, and combinations of neuromodulation with neuro- imaging have begun to provide a more refined understanding of the fact that modulation of one network often induces effects in other networks [10]. This approach has encouraged a more holistic understanding of social cognition in which different classes of processes operate in concert. The field also increasingly recognizes that interoceptive signals from the body play a causal role in many aspects of social cognition [11]. Again, animal models now pave the way to more fine-grained insights into the necessary nature of particular processes [9]. While traditional neuromodulation alters the activity of entire brain regions, molecular tools now allow us to selec- tively modulate neurons of a certain cell type, or engrams of neurons that had been involved in a particular task. This will allow us eventually to address much more specific questions of how neurons involved in one process influence social behavior in a different context. Alongside these advances in low-level precision is an expanding appre- ciation that high-level factors, such as society, culture, status, and groups, can influence basic neural function and development. If the human brain evolved to support survival in social contexts, these contexts include groups and cultures, not just mates and kin. And thus an understanding of neural mechanism is incomplete without an appreciation of its range of social function. Indeed, the neural processes underlying social percep- tion, cognition, and emotion are modulated by group membership and status cues [12,13], and the brain is attuned to the structure social networks and theway information moves through them [5,14]. Behavior in social groups is guided by a moral code, and research on prefrontal cortical function is illuminating the neural computations underlying fairness and honesty in social judgments (Carlson & Crockett, this volume). Many aspects of social cognition, such as empathy, are no longer considered automatic processes that unfold with subject specific inten- sity, but rather processes that people selectively approach or avoid based on motivation in a social context [15]. Finally, the field is becoming increasingly aware of the fact that processes observed in constrained lab setting may or may-not be representative of social processes ‘in the wild’ [2,16]. Novel technologies that allow us to www.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Psychology 2018, 24:iv–vi vi Editorial overview measure physiology, behavior, and brain activity while References participants move and interact more freely offers an 1. Hackel LM, Amodio DM: Computational neuroscience approaches to social cognition. Curr Opin Psychol 2018. opportunity to perform neuroscience in naturalistic set- tings. Of course, by relaxing experimental controls on 2. Kliemann D, Adolphs R: The social neuroscience of mentalizing: challenges and recommendations. Curr Opin Psychol 2018. what our participants do and perceive, these more natu- Neurocomputational approaches to ralistic paradigms challenge traditional analysis methods. 3. Konovalov A, Hu J, Ruff CC: social behavior. Curr Opin.Psychol 2018. However, recent advances in analytical techniques, which 4. Freeman JB, Stolier RM, Brooks JA, Stillerman BA: The neural use signals from one participant as the model for analyz- representational geometry of social perception. Curr Opin ing those from other participants,